Page 67 - Proceeding The 2nd International Seminar of Science and Technology : Accelerating Sustainable Innovation Towards Society 5.0

nd
The 2 International Seminar of Science and Technology
“Accelerating Sustainable innovation towards Society 5.0”
ISST 2022 FST UT 2022
Universitas Terbuka
3 0.33 0.22 0.45
4 1.18 0.86 1.38
5 1.10 0.64 0.83
6 1.16 0.70 1.18
7 2.04 1.33 1.29
8 2.28 2.12 2.11
Based on Table. 5, it can be seen the comparison of the computational
time for the three methods. On all clusters the FPCM method has less
time than the FCM method. Meanwhile on the cluster 8 in the P FCM
method have time more slightly compared to the FPCM method.
Based on this, it can be concluded that the computational time of
FPCM is faster than FPCM FCM and PFCM.
3.2.3 Modified Partition Coefficient (MPC)
Table 6. Comparison MPC.
MPC
Cluster
FCM FPCM PFCM
2 0.4640712 0.4640706 0.4608578
3 0.4389218 0.4388908 0.4301043
4 0.3809439 0.3808963 0.3719067
5 0.3595105 0.3595786 0.3527553
6 0.3753652 0.3754238 0.3677679
7 0.3459356 0.3460403 0.3386125
8 0.3346046 0.3344400 0.3216874
The MPC value is used to determine the best method. The higher
MPC value then it shows the optimal value. In Table. 6, The MPC
values in all clusters in the FCM. Method higher than the PFCM
method. Meanwhile, in clusters 5, 6 and 7 in the FPCM method, has
the highest MPC value compared to the FCM method. Because of
that, it can be concluded that the use of the FCM method in research
this is more methods better compared to the FPCM and PFCM
methods.

46 ISST 2022 – FST Universitas Terbuka, Indonesia
International Seminar of Science and Technology “Accelerating Sustainable
Towards Society 5.0